Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

What do we do when a user takes an image we have refused due to source, uploads it to archive.com (which is an acceptable source), and resubmits it?

Originally submitted image from https://ficcaocientificabrasileira.wo...
Now added to archive.org https://archive.org/details/mtxx-mh-2...

It seems to me that the image is now acceptable, but I don't feel good about it.

What cracks me up the most about our "list" is the fact that Amazon and E-bay use each others photos ALL OF THE TIME!! I don't understand it. The whole copyright issue is one for Amazon just as much as for the other resell sites. Nobody is getting the permission necessary before they sell their copy there or on Abe's, etc.

Martin wrote: "... It seems to me that the image is now acceptable, but I don't feel good about it."

One of the benefits of being unpaid volunteers, is we can walk away from any request, at any point in time.

I'd say trust your ethics gut instinct. Personally I don't get involved in a request if archive.org is stated as a source, even though it's permitted by staff decision. Sometimes our personal standards are higher than the group rules.

Thanks both.
I don't usually get involved with archive.org but got sucked into this one. I probably will just leave it - it's a quality upgrade anyway, so not as though the book is without an image.

I just looked at this request and the book. There is a wrong link. This's cover for different edition.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
This book has the correct cover. And this edition (1999) on archive.org has the same cover.
https://archive.org/details/vittorio-...

But this book
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...
has the same cover (worse quality) as link
https://archive.org/details/mtxx-mh-2...

+1 for going with your gut.

archive.org shouldn't be allowed as a cover source.

Why? We can literally see inside the book to verify what is inside such as the ISBNs and the publication history. With the older books that is what is most important to me. Most seem to be items from libraries.
I'm concerned about all of the "books" I've seen for Kindle that have covers that any teen today could do a better job at. Then when you read the synopsis they are obviously scams.

Tawnya wrote: "Why? We can literally see inside the book to verify what is inside such as the ISBNs and the publication history. With the older books that is what is most important to me. Most seem to be items fr..."
Because it is so easy to game the system.

I rarely do book requests & don't do requests in the cover folder at all for this reason.

Carol She's So Novel ꧁꧂ wrote: "+1 for going with your gut.

archive.org shouldn't be allowed as a cover source."

It’s often the only online source of cover image for out of print vintage books, so I hope they don’t remove it. :) But having clarification that only works that are there as regular library files, not for random cover images, would be nice.